Right, its just a little case study, which might help you understand the usefulness or not so usefulness of web directories. I went through hundred of directories and their backlinks/age and hand picked 5 web of them for submissions, all of these directories have decent PR, good submissions and a lot of backlinks. I submited in all of them with 5 days interval each, as soon as links started getting cached by google, i started observing drop in my serps for my main keywords, all related to home page. At this point i am fretting as to what other good sources are left which can help me out rank my competitors who are spamming blogs and forums and beat me left right for my keywords.
There are too many variables involved in ranking to blame your lower ranks on submitting to a handful of directories. In most cases submitters use the same submission set (title, description, etc.) on hundreds and even thousands of directories. Forget for a moment how easy this is for an algorithm to detect as user generated content. Using various submission sets, which are preferably hand written each time, can be good for those that read what was submitted and also good for you. I know a number of individuals that claim directories carry little value. Fortunately a few of these people gave me some additional details so I could do some research for myself. What I found was that these people abused directories by submitting the same submission set to thousands of directories. Directory owners share blame for approving submissions without editing. But as a submitter, you have control over this. And since the majority of directories don't edit and just approve or deny, the bulk of the responsibility falls into your lap. You should never resort to what your competitors are doing (spamming). In the long run, their ranks will take a significant and possibly permanent hit. Commenting on blogs is great, providing the comments add value to the page. Participating in forums is also good too. Once again, adding value to the topic is key. Spam may result in short term gains, but those sites that play by the rules will eventually reach the top and stay there. It's common knowledge that directories are still quite effective for SEO purposes. However, most are premium directories which charge a fee for editing. Most free directories lack the resources to process hundreds of submissions per day. In some cases the submissions received at a free directory can exceed 1,000. That's why places like DMOZ have backlogs which would probably take decades to clear out. And that's assuming the category even has an editor. My advice is to not look down on directories but to submit a hand written submission each time. Instead of following the pack, use your company or site name as the title. Mix it up quite a bit. And don't overlook the top paid directories out there. They carry quite a bit of long-term value. Unfortunately many individuals which are promoting their sites have a marketing budget of $0 and are missing out on some good links and potential traffic. If you truly believe in your site, submit to some quality paid directories and report back with your results. Good luck
Snowbird: I have seen the rise and fall of directories, i have had sites where i saw boost fromd irectories and i have seen sites which went down due to directories O have had sites which would yield in excess of 100k uniques a day, so i know what i am doing. Firstly, i did not submit to mass of directories, i only submitte dto handful, which is 5 directories. I thoroughly checked their backlinks, ranks in google for their keywords. Each listing i made had unique title and unique lengthy description, not just that, but i also tried to submit site into slightly different categories, so that bots do not think of it as dupe at all. You are right, spam might and might not get their sites banned, but honestly that is easier and cheaper way, as it seems. Forum spam, Blog spam and bingo, you have thousands of unique Ips pointing to your site. This can yield good results if done in moderation. I started this new site and all i have been doing is build organic links, expensive blog posts in high traffic blogs, tons of them, i only pick those blogs which usually dont rely on guest blogging. But nah, i can only reach to a certain point.
I don't understand this. We use the free directory lists very effectictive. They get our sites started, they work and are sometimes all that is needed to rank for uncompetitive key words What about anchor text? I have always understood that its the anchor text in a link which is important.
Is it possible that it is this link building activity that is responsible for your drop in ranks and not that of a mere five directories? The reason why I say directories still hold value is from present day experience. I regularly submit websites to some top directories and always notice an impact in SERPS within a brief period of time. When I see this change, then I will get concerned. I had a conversation with another directory owner about Google's new algorithm. During these discussions I pointed out how this algorithm update, which allegedly targets scraped content and low quality websites according to Matt Cutts, may impact the directory industry. Generally speaking, those directories that simply hit the approve or deny button may see their entire domain authority drop significantly. If this were true, even the unique hand written submissions you made to such directories may carry a much lower value then they would before Google's change. That's good for the directory industry as a whole since it will give credit to those directories which have editorial standards. But it is bad for submitters as it is another variable to consider during the submission process. Leading paid directories do have editorial standards and as such demand unique descriptions. Most free directories don't, which may become a major consideration for submitters in the months and years ahead. @khanter A natural backlink profile will have many links using the site or business name as the anchor text. It stands to reason that since such links appear naturally occurring, that they too would pass added value.
We not super league players by any stretch of the imagination but I just can't see the value of a link containing anchor text that the site ranks #1 for anyway. And that's the same question I have about unsolicited links. They seldom come with the anchor text you need. It's hard work getting the right anchor text in the right place. Is it fair to penalise hard working web masters who manually submit their sites to link directories? Should they worry about whether they are overstepping the mark? There is nothing more natural than link building. Is Google really trying to discourage the practice? When you say added value what do you mean? I watch specific search strings and I can't see how one gets a site to move in the serps without that anchor text.
Every body has the knowledge about the directories but I know a number of individuals that claim directories carry little value. Fortunately a few of these people gave me some additional details so I could do some research for myself. What I found was that these people abused directories by submitting the same submission set to thousands of directories. Directory owners share blame for approving submissions without editing. But as a submitter, you have control over this. And since the majority of directories don't edit and just approve or deny, the bulk of the responsibility falls into your lap.
Dude, i never did a bulk submission and believe it or not bulk submissions can get you started if you are no where, but its risky waters and i don't do that.
It is very least likely to see a drop in SERPS from posting an indepth review in a high PR/Traffic blog, a post which gets dozens of comments too, i have been doing that for 8 months and saw a constant growth. The drop in serps comes down to those keywords which were used in directories and directories do not have too much of good reputation. It is 100 times harder to get your post up in a blog which gets 80k uniques a day than to get links in Pr5 Pr6 so called reputed directories, all you need is 30 to 40 dollars. I don't know what kind of directories you talk about, please share with me and tell me what kind of serp changes you observed after submitting your urls in those directories, i will appreciate if you can show me those urls too. You are beating the air here mate and contradicting your own previous statement. That is not a new algorithim, that is just an additional filter, which has recently been added or upgraded. If directory is bad, it doesn't matter what filter is in position, it won't help you in serps no matter what type of description you have written. Ofcourse, these are handful, uness you can prove me otherwise.
And the latest buzz is that JC Penney and Forbes were identified by Google for paid link schemes. http://www.vmoptions.com/paid-directory-list.php (It's my personal list and not user submitted) Now that I shared the URLs, please do the same and show us the directories that allegedly hurt your ranks. Just a poor choice of words on my part. It was a new algorithm update. Since you are sticking to your guns and blaming five directories for your loss in ranks, then maybe you should submit your competitors to those same directories and watch them drop? Seriously, if being listed in a few directories would drop someones ranks, then we are all in for major trouble. I've been in the directory industry long enough as both a directory owner and submitter to know that there is no way that being listed in five directories is going to hurt your ranks. If anything, they would not carry any SEO value. Changes in how Google values your existing backlinks is most likely the culprit. And since you appear to have focused mostly on blog posts, you may want to consider diversification.
google also recommend good directory links. read at the bottom of the first post by google of this below page http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/06/quality-links-to-your-site.html Directory entries are often mentioned as another way to promote young sites in the Google index. There are great, topical directories that add value to the Internet. But there are not many of them in proportion to those of lower quality. If you decide to submit your site to a directory, make sure it's on topic, moderated, and well structured. Mass submissions, which are sometimes offered as a quick work-around SEO method, are mostly useless and not likely to serve your purposes. get links from high quality directories like dir.yahoo.com, business.com, botw.org, mastbusiness.com and your ranking will surely improve.
A lots of factor play important role in determining the Search Engine Ranking. It doesn't make any sense what you're saying. I am totally disagree with you..
You don't get penalised for third party links you have no control over. Unless by some slim chance you are buying position. What directories did you submit to? Do they sell featured links? Do they charge extra for deep links? Do they crow about high PR? Have they not possibly been flagged for selling links? But if this is the case, you can't just go all out and brand all directories as useless. We get very good results from nasty spammy throw away directories and even better results from sites being run by web masters who understand that editorial policies do matter. Are you not trying too hard. Why go to such lengths? Why is it so difficult to be real? Do we really have to fake it? Link directories are the way we secure the anchor text we all need. Google uses them. We use them. And everything else, organic links included, is the stuff we use to glue it all together. So why complicate it? For how long? A bit silly if you are building a site to last. Of course it works. But that does not make it a clever way to go.
You obviously read stuff on forums and live up to half cooked statements made by self-claimed SEOs. There are various verticals when it comes to external links. There is a maturity level, where sites become immune to link spam, at this point algorithims have solid understanding of a site and crap links do not affect the rankings of such sites. Now when you buy couple of crap third party links in chunks for a beginner site, you can see your self drowning depp in the serps. Don't make broad statements for stuff which you don't have understanding. 98% of the directories match to the list you have made. Beside the obvious few, all webdirectories offer featured listings. And i only wrote results of my case study, it doesn't mean what did not work for me will not work for you either, you can go submit to as many nasty spammy directories if that helps your site. Dude you are talking a spammers language, you really have no clue. Dmoz and other good directories usually prefer unique metas, guess all the pros are stupid to not add their sites with their same metas in spammy nasty directories you talk off. Its not about faking, its a bout smart SEO and adding value to your site and directory you have submitted into. Its silly for you to assume i am submitting sites. Dude you are contradicting your self in every other sentence, at times it seems you are trying to make me sound like if i am adding into crap directories and in next sentence you make it sound like nasty crap works!
:S Its not about winning an argument here dude, its about understanding varied verticals of good seo. Every body buys links, this is how it happens, while i write this, a friend debunked another top shopping site into buying links, now you need to classify between buying links and adding value. If you offer discounts, products, or add value to site in some way, you can get away with getting links in reyrn, but if you blatantly go around and submit your site into directories which only require your money and will accept the listing is a quick indication of paid link, a link which is merely awarded for money and is going to be used for manipulation. A site with 100k uniques a day, won't accept a crappy review which ads no value to their site and it further links to a crappy non relevant sites, but 90% of directories would do, no wonder why directories were penalised. I don't know what are you beating here. http://www.vmoptions.com/paid-directory-list.php (It's my personal list and not user submitted) I have no interest in harming their business, i will pm you their links. This shows your understanding of SEO, it takes time to learn things. Certain sites have certain amount immunity, you can buy 1000 spam links and point them to amazon and it won't tint their listing, then point same sort of links, may be even as low as 80 links in short time period to a beginner site which has not earned any kind of authority as of yet, you will learn the concept of domain authority and domain immunity. Its really not fun getting challenged by people who have no clue about what they are talking and then refuse to understand. I have been in directory industry long enough, i have seen people abuse it to a point where Google has to step up and slap us all to oblivion. Dude, even a single bad link can have affect on your serps, you need to do a lot of testing, a lot of testing for the learning purpose and document things, don't just make assumptions of your own based on half cooked stuff you read on forums. I agree, finally you said something sensible, the diversification, one has to have diversification in order to make backlink profile look more natural and healthy and thats what iam doing, its just that my best links come from blog posts!
Wow, you are really gonna have to present your case a lot clearer here before people believe that this caused a drop in SERPS. Could you please give some evidence of this, perhaps a listing of the sites, where and what you listed, where these nofollow, follow, paid, free, what? You can't just come over here post this with no evidence to back up your contention and then expect people to believe you. If it were truly possible to cause your SERP's to drop by simply listing your site in certain directories, then everyone would be listing each others respective sites in this manner in an effort to mess with their competition.
You should re read all of my posts above and then you won't be doing WOW. But i will make it easier for you, this was a pure test to see how directory links affect my serps. I stopped acquiring links for 15 days, and then went through hundred of directories and then hand selected directories, which seemed to rank well in google for their keywords and had a lot of backlinks. Then i submitted into each with varied metas with interval of 5 to 10 days or something, then when google started finding those links one by one, those exact titles got pushed down in serps one by one. My ranking for other keywords seem un affected. These were followed paid listings and all of directory owners edited my listing and shuffled it to the sub categories,w hich they found more appropriate,w hich tells me that there had been some sort of editorial process in palce at those directories. You don't need to believe mate. Again, it really annoys me when people read half cooked stuff of internet and then slap their assumption in and come talk like Pro's. Go read one of my posts above where i talked about immunity.
Can you say with a 100% degree of certainty that when you saw this "rise and fall" the only thing you were doing was listing in directories? I fail to see how you can nail down a rise or fall in PR, SERP's or anything really, conclusively from directories alone. Where's your control group? You know the one where you DID NOTHING!!! Without that, its really hard to concluded that this is anything other than a coincidence. I did read it. That's why I asked for some real data. I did not say I did not believe it. I said without any actual factual statistics, a control group and some other empirical evidence, I find it hard to believe. What's half cooked is your OP. It makes some pretty serious statements with absolutely no evidence to back it up.
Not so. If I am not mistaken you have bought expensive links from some high PR (quality) directories and are a little alarmed because your serp's have apparently dropped. This leads you to deduce (incorrectly) that all directories are selling position, will get you penalised and that you should stick to spamming forums and blogs. There is little doubt that you are not only confused but horribly wrong as well. Unlike stuff like PR, it does work. That is why people do it. And because there is so much disinformation on these forums the people who use these crappy techniques are never going to understand what crappy techniques add up to in the long run. There is not much to understand about the fact that you cannot get penalised for stuff over which you have no control. It just doesn't happen. To the contrary Google is very accommodating. They put up with all sorts of spammy crap and bad behaviour. They are very tolerant in the main. So if you have hit a filter, you have done something, you have been nabbed. And rather than rubbishing all directories why don't you look for your obvious mistake. Aren't you the silly one?